Nungaray

Nungaray v. Litton Loan Servicing, LP

Good Law
135 Cal. Rptr. 3d 442·200 Cal. App. 4th 1499·2011 Cal. App. LEXIS 1458
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 22, 2011No. B230580California2,351 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Gilbert, J.

*1501 Opinion

Homeowners hope to enter into a loan modification agreement with their lender pursuant to the federal Home Affordable Mortgage Program (HAMP). Preliminary to a possible loan modification agreement, owners execute a “loan work-out plan” for the lender’s review. During its review, lender accepts reduced mortgage payments from owners.

We conclude this plan, however unique, is no less subject to general principles of contract law. We also conclude that when a lender suspends foreclosure proceedings pursuant to such a plan, as it did here, it did not violate the so-called one-form-of-action rule.

Ruben and Dora Nungaray appeal a summary judgment entered in favor of defendants Litton Loan Servicing, LP (Litton), and Bank of America, National Association (Bank). We affirm.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

On January 23, 2010, the Nungarays brought an action against Litton and the Bank, alleging causes of action for breach of contract, negligence, and quiet title. The lawsuit arose from the Nungarays’ default on an obligation secured by a deed of trust against their Simi Valley home, and a subsequent nonjudicial foreclosure. The Nungarays allege that the foreclosure sale…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.